On Thu, 16 Oct 2008, Nigel Jones wrote:
> On Wed, 2008-10-15 at 21:02 -0500, Mike McGrath wrote:
> > So I was going through some old tickets and stumbled across this:
> > https://fedorahosted.org/fedora-infrastructure/ticket/164
> > I gave it a quick look over and I'm not against this integration but I'm
> > generally apathetic about it. So I ask if anyone here is interested
> > enough to get it into Fedora. I'm not sure if both the server and client
> > versions are provided there but it looks like what is there is GPLv2.
> > Thoughts?
> I've been looking at it, here is my thoughts:
> Fedora CVS:
> * We'd gain visibility from having people see our commits to packages
> * As such, we'd be able to show that we are active and not a pack of
> Fedora Hosted:
> * SVN: Scripts work natively and I'd really be interested in getting
> this going for interested projects
> * Git: Would require a bit more investigation, but it looks 'okay' and
> possible - I'd be willing to do this
> * HG: I recall even upstream do this
> In my opinion, while there are no direct benefits, it does promote some
> visibility for Fedora/Fedora Hosted/our hosted projects.
> As such, I'd be willing to step up to the plate and do this.
> N.B> They are just publicly available scripts, I see no benefit to
> including such scripts as a separate package, especially as there are so
> many different scripts for different VCS' the maintainability of such a
> package would be just NUTS
Putting it in a package is 2 fold. If the scripts really do change so
often they can't go in a package then perhaps we shouldn't deploy them as
thats a high cost for us to maintain. Also by packaging them, and the
server portion if its available, we know we're using open source clients
and submiting to an open source server. Even if we aren't running the
server I think its important that for integration with us that the server
software be available.
Fedora-infrastructure-list mailing list